- 08 Jun, 2016 1 commit
-
-
Noah Misch authored
Clément Prévost and Peter Eisentraut
-
- 07 Jun, 2016 24 commits
-
-
Alvaro Herrera authored
To achieve this, ANALYZE the data table before querying it, as suggested by Tom Lane. On my system, this enables the test to pass with 128 kB of work_mem (a value with which other tests fail -- so it seems good enough). Reported by Michaël Paquier.
-
Alvaro Herrera authored
In VPATH builds, the build directory was not being searched for files in GETTEXT_FILES, leading to failure to construct the .pot files. This has bit me all along, but never hard enough to get it fixed; I suppose not a lot of people uses VPATH and NLS-enabled builds, and those that do, don't do "make update-po" often. This is a longstanding problem, so backpatch all the way back.
-
Alvaro Herrera authored
Commit 6820094d mixed up types of parent object (table) with type of sub-object being commented on. Noticed while fixing docs for COMMENT ON ACCESS METHOD. Backpatch to 9.5, like that commit.
-
Alvaro Herrera authored
This omission caused an assertion error in \dA+.
-
Alvaro Herrera authored
COMMENT ON ACCESS METHOD was missing; add it, along psql tab-completion support for it. psql was also missing a way to list existing access methods; the new \dA command does that. Also add tab-completion support for DROP ACCESS METHOD. Author: Michael Paquier Discussion: https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/CAB7nPqTzdZdu8J7EF8SXr_R2U5bSUUYNOT3oAWBZdEoggnwhGA@mail.gmail.com
-
Tom Lane authored
This commit reverts 137805f8 as well as the associated commits 015e8894, 5306df28, and 68d704ed. We found multiple bugs in this feature, and there was concern about possible planner slowdown (though to be fair, exhibiting a very large slowdown proved difficult). The way forward requires a considerable rewrite, which may or may not be possible to accomplish in time for beta2. In my judgment reviewing the rewrite will be easier to accomplish starting from a clean slate, so let's temporarily revert what's there now. This also leaves us in a safe state if it turns out to be necessary to postpone the rewrite to the next development cycle. Discussion: <20160429102531.GA13701@huehner.biz>
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
It was previously suggested that "esoteric" operations such as creating a new access method would require direct manipulation of the system catalogs, but that example has gone away, and I can't think of a new one to replace it, so just put in some weasel wording.
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
-
Simon Riggs authored
-
Tom Lane authored
Michael Paquier, David Johnston, Tom Lane Discussion: <CAB7nPqQB8dcFmY1uodmiJOSZdhBFOx-us-uW6rfYrzhpEiBR2g@mail.gmail.com>
-
Robert Haas authored
The lo_oid function provided by this extension is PARALLEL SAFE. Andreas Karlsson
-
Robert Haas authored
All functions provided by this extension are PARALLEL SAFE. Andreas Karlsson
-
Robert Haas authored
All functions provided by this extension are PARALLEL SAFE. Andreas Karlsson
-
Robert Haas authored
All functions provided by this extension are PARALLEL SAFE. Andreas Karlsson
-
Robert Haas authored
All functions provided by this extension are PARALLEL SAFE. Andreas Karlsson
-
Robert Haas authored
All citext functions are PARALLEL SAFE, and a couple of them can benefit from having aggregate combine functions. Andreas Karlsson
-
Stephen Frost authored
Noticed while reviewing snapshot management.
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
crosstabview.c was not added to nls.mk when it was added. Also remove redundant gettext markers, since psql_error() is already registered as a gettext keyword.
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
The new option --progress-timestamp was just added at the end. Put it in alphabetical order.
-
Simon Riggs authored
-
Stephen Frost authored
dumpAccessMethod() didn't get the memo that we now have a bitfield for the components which should be dumped instead of a simple boolean. Correct that by checking if the relevant bit is set for each component being dumped out (and not dumping it out if it isn't set). This corrects an issue where CREATE ACCESS METHOD commands were being included in non-binary-upgrades when an extension included an access method (as the bloom extensions does). Also add a regression test to make sure that we only dump out the ACCESS METHOD commands, when they are part of an extension, when doing a binary upgrade. Pointed out by Thom Brown.
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
In commit 5c3c3cd0, the new tests were apparently just dumped into the first convenient file. Move them to a separate file dedicated to testing that functionality and leave the plpython_test test to test basic functionality, as it did before.
-
- 06 Jun, 2016 6 commits
-
-
Tom Lane authored
If we ANALYZE only selected columns of a table, we should not postpone auto-analyze because of that; other columns may well still need stats updates. As committed, the counter is left alone if a column list is given, whether or not it includes all analyzable columns of the table. Per complaint from Tomasz Ostrowski. It's been like this a long time, so back-patch to all supported branches. Report: <ef99c1bd-ff60-5f32-2733-c7b504eb960c@ato.waw.pl>
-
Robert Haas authored
If a Gather node has read as many tuples as it needs (for example, due to Limit) it may detach the queue connecting it to the worker before reading all of the worker's tuples. Rather than let the worker continue to generate and send all of the results, have it stop after sending the next tuple. More could be done here to stop the worker even quicker, but this is about as well as we can hope to do for 9.6. This is in response to a problem report from Andreas Seltenreich. Commit 44339b89 should be actually be sufficient to fix that example even without this change, but it seems better to do this, too, since we might otherwise waste quite a large amount of effort in one or more workers. Discussion: CAA4eK1KOKGqmz9bGu+Z42qhRwMbm4R5rfnqsLCNqFs9j14jzEA@mail.gmail.com Amit Kapila
-
Robert Haas authored
Prior to this patch, it was occasionally possible, after shm_mq_sendv had previously returned SHM_MQ_DETACHED, for a later shm_mq_sendv operation to fail an assertion instead of just again returning SHM_MQ_ATTACHED. From the shm_mq code's point of view, it was expecting to be called again with the same arguments, since the previous operation had only partially completed. However, a caller who isn't using non-blocking mode won't be prepared to repeat the call with the same arguments, and this code shouldn't expect that they will. Repair in such a way that we'll be OK whether the next call uses the same arguments or not. Found by Andreas Seltenreich. Analysis and sketch of fix by Amit Kapila. Patch by me, reviewed by Amit Kapila.
-
Robert Haas authored
For historical reasons, copyFile and rewriteVisibilityMap took a force argument which was always passed as true, meaning that any existing file should be overwritten. However, it seems much safer to instead fail if a file we need to write already exists. While we're at it, remove the "force" argument altogether, since it was never passed as anything other than true (and now we would never pass it as anything other than false, if we kept it). Noted by Andres Freund during post-commit review of the patch that added rewriteVisibilityMap, commit 7087166a, but this also changes the behavior when copying files without rewriting them. Patch by Masahiko Sawada.
-
Robert Haas authored
Jim Nasby
-
Robert Haas authored
In the old logic, if read() were to return an error, we'd silently stop rewriting the visibility map at that point in the file. That's safe, but reporting the error is better, so do that instead. Report by Andres Freund. Patch by Masahiko Sawada, with one correction by me.
-
- 05 Jun, 2016 2 commits
-
-
Peter Eisentraut authored
-
Tom Lane authored
Fix still another bug in commit 35fcb1b3: it failed to fully initialize the SortSupport states it introduced to allow the executor to re-check ORDER BY expressions containing distance operators. That led to a null pointer dereference if the sortsupport code tried to use ssup_cxt. The problem only manifests in narrow cases, explaining the lack of previous field reports. It requires a GiST-indexable distance operator that lacks SortSupport and is on a pass-by-ref data type, which among core+contrib seems to be only btree_gist's interval opclass; and it requires the scan to be done as an IndexScan not an IndexOnlyScan, which explains how btree_gist's regression test didn't catch it. Per bug #14134 from Jihyun Yu. Peter Geoghegan Report: <20160511154904.2603.43889@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
-
- 04 Jun, 2016 1 commit
-
- 03 Jun, 2016 6 commits
-
-
Tom Lane authored
It'd be good for "(x AND y) AND z" to produce a three-child AND node whether or not operator_precedence_warning is on, but that failed to happen when it's on because makeAndExpr() didn't look through the added AEXPR_PAREN node. This has no effect on generated plans because prepqual.c would flatten the AND nest anyway; but it does affect the number of parens printed in ruleutils.c, for example. I'd already fixed some similar hazards in parse_expr.c in commit abb16465, but didn't think to search gram.y for problems of this ilk. Per gripe from Jean-Pierre Pelletier. Report: <fa0535ec6d6428cfec40c7e8a6d11156@mail.gmail.com>
-
Tom Lane authored
This attempts to buy back some of whatever performance we lost from fixing bug #14174 by inlining the initial checks in MakeExpandedObjectReadOnly() into the callers. We can do that in a macro without creating multiple- evaluation hazards, so it's pretty much free notationally; and the amount of code added to callers should be minimal as well. (Testing a value can't take many more instructions than passing it to a subroutine.) Might as well inline DatumIsReadWriteExpandedObject() while we're at it. This is an ABI break for callers, so it doesn't seem safe to put into 9.5, but I see no reason not to do it in HEAD.
-
Tom Lane authored
Further thought about bug #14174 motivated me to try the case of a R/W datum being returned from a VALUES list, and sure enough it was broken. Fix that. Also add a regression test case exercising the same scenario for FunctionScan. That's not broken right now, because the function's result will get shoved into a tuplestore between generation and use; but it could easily become broken whenever we get around to optimizing FunctionScan better. There don't seem to be any other places where we put the result of expression evaluation into a virtual tuple slot that could then be the source for Vars of further expression evaluation, so I think this is the end of this bug.
-
Tom Lane authored
If a plan node output expression returns an "expanded" datum, and that output column is referenced in more than one place in upper-level plan nodes, we need to ensure that what is returned is a read-only reference not a read/write reference. Otherwise one of the referencing sites could scribble on or even delete the expanded datum before we have evaluated the others. Commit 1dc5ebc9, which introduced this feature, supposed that it'd be sufficient to make SubqueryScan nodes force their output columns to read-only state. The folly of that was revealed by bug #14174 from Andrew Gierth, and really should have been immediately obvious considering that the planner will happily optimize SubqueryScan nodes out of the plan without any regard for this issue. The safest fix seems to be to make ExecProject() force its results into read-only state; that will cover every case where a plan node returns expression results. Actually we can delegate this to ExecTargetList() since we can recursively assume that plain Vars will not reference read-write datums. That should keep the extra overhead down to something minimal. We no longer need ExecMakeSlotContentsReadOnly(), which was introduced only in support of the idea that just a few plan node types would need to do this. In the future it would be nice to have the planner account for this problem and inject force-to-read-only expression evaluation nodes into only the places where there's a risk of multiple evaluation. That's not a suitable solution for 9.5 or even 9.6 at this point, though. Report: <20160603124628.9932.41279@wrigleys.postgresql.org>
-
Robert Haas authored
The partial paths that get modified may already have been used as part of a GatherPath which appears in the path list, so modifying them is not a good idea at this stage - especially because this code has no check that the PathTarget is in fact parallel-safe. When partial aggregation is being performed, this is actually harmless because we'll end up replacing the pathtargets here with the correct ones within create_grouping_paths(). But if we've got a query tree containing only scan/join operations then this can result in incorrectly pushing down parallel-restricted target list entries. If those are, for example, references to subqueries, that can crash the server; but it's wrong in any event. Amit Kapila
-
Robert Haas authored
This is so that extensions can use it. Michael Paquier
-